JJHardy7

Impossible in the NBA. There's three ways to acquire players in the NBA. Draft, trades and free agency. We're capped out, not bad enough to pick in the top 10 where pretty much all the good players go and don't have a lot of trade assets. We're likely going to continue to be the 7th or 8th seed or we're going to tear down the roster and start from scratch. I'd prefer the latter. It's not impossible. There are a few second round picks on this team that managed to not go in the top 10 yet are pretty darn good players. I know it's much easier to win a championship with a top 10 type talent, but it doesn't HAVE to happen that way. I'm more worried about getting in the top 4 seeds before I am worried about a championship. It's far from impossible in my mind. The right decisions have to be made and that's much more important than what spot a team is drafting from...if a team is usually drafting in the 20s it's because they made the right decisions. You'll still get a pick in the middle of the first round or so if you're a 7 or 8 seed. There's nothing wrong with that. I also think the Bucks have a ton of trade assets...just not maybe this year. Redd and RJ should go for a nice haul in the final years of their deals. They are pretty solid players and they'll have what every team wants -- expiring contracts. Both of these guys could help a team on a championship run. The real question will be what the return is. Now Gadz on the other hand has zero trade value now and in the future. Hey what happened to this trade that was all but done pending Herbie's signature? Are they sending him the notice via pony express?? Probably the same reason Conley played last night...the source was wrong and the deal isn't going to happen. I'm just shocked.

And in my opinion, was Alexander the right pick for the Bucks? HECK NO!! I thought he might have been the right pick before trading for RJ. That's when I thought they may have been best to trade down a bit or take a different player. The Bucks aren't a franchise that can afford that high of a pick being a player that barely sees the floor. So to answer the question Fondy asked, I'm almost cheering for the Bucks to fail this year. I just think this team needs to be gutted, with Mbah a Moute and Bogut being the only players that stay, and started from stratch. The only thing I worry about in this scenario is keeping Hammond around. I really think this guy is going to get the team back on track. I think what he did or tried to do in the off-season was to balance winning now with winning in the future. I don't think his ultimate goal is to be a #7 or #8 seed this year or next year, but if he can while continuing to build the core that's what he'll do. I'm not saying these guys are or aren't the future, but I think Hammond's plan revolves around (in alpha order not by talent) Alexander, Bogut, Mbah a Moute, Sessions, and possibly Villanueva (I think he's going to be traded before the deadline, but we'll see). I'm not saying these young guys will bring glory back to the Bucks, but they may only be a few young pieces away along with a blend of veterans from being a top 4 seed in the east. I know that sounds a little to optimistic, but the east IMO just isn't that good as a whole and in a few years when I think Hammond's real plan takes shape LeBron may not be with the Cavs and the big three on the Celtics may not be on that team. The one team that concerns me now and in the future is the Magic, but I guess we'll see. It is nice to see the Bucks back in the playoff hunt now even if it's in the mediocre east and a bad seed.

This is what I'm pointing out. Alexander was picked in the lottery based on those 11 games and then his workouts. If those 11 games happened in the beginning of the year and then he fell off, he wouldn't have been talked about in the lottery. Since those 11 games happened towards the end of the season and in the Big East tournament, he got a ton of hype from ESPN, that's when he all of a sudden started rising up the draft boards. Then his workouts came and he rose a little more because of his athleticism. The problem is, we looked at those 11 games and saw big improvement from the previous year and thought he had a lot of potential, but didn't look at the rest of the year and how he had only made a slight improvement until those final 11 games. I'm not stating whether or not Alexander was the right pick...it's way too early. There have been plenty of players who have helped their stock towards the end of the season and the tournament. This is due to the big attention drawn to those games. I don't think Joe went from a scrub to the numbers he had. If that's your opinion, that's fine. It does seem his game got better with the pressure/more on the line and he did have good workouts. I think you're acting like nobody had Alexander as a lottery pick...plenty of scouts did. The NBA Draft is becoming more and more of a crap shoot and I think we'll find out if it was the right pick...I think it was, but again it's way too early to judge any pick right now.

Dominic James started as a freshman, and averaged double digits. He must be a lottery pick. Again...I am NOT talking about why he was picked where he was. Would you call James a bad college player? I never said since he started his sophomore year he's a lottery pick. You may want to re-read or read my posts. My point was/is that Alexander wasn't a bad college player...it had nothing to do with being a lottery pick or not.

Okay, let me rephrase that. Do those 14 point, 5 rebound games as a junior strike you as that of a lottery pick? They don't to me. You either have to be dominating as an upperclassmen or have a standout skill if you're not dominating to consider being drafted that high. I don't see any standout skill and he only dominated for 1/3 of a season. The main problem I had with the pick is that I think the Bucks saw his last 11 games and then saw how he tested as an athlete and fell in love with him. So much so, that they only worked out him and Anthony Randolph. That's terrible that they zeroed in on basically two guys and didn't even consider anybody else. My entire statements were in regards to you calling him a bad college player...nothing at all to do with the pick. How can you knock his last games of his college career and then at the same time say his 5 games (small sample) means anything? If he played well in 'garbage' time, isn't he playing against better players than the summer league? I think your entire back and forth and picking what makes your points means one thing...it's too early to tell on Alexander. I personally like him and hope he becomes a player. Is that a slam dunk to happen? I don't think so, but I do think he's athletic enough to be a player in the league. Let's just try and remember he's only halfway through his first NBA season. Alexander also provides things a lot of the lottery picks and other NBA players don't...he WANTS to be in Milwaukee and he's going to give you effort. And also, Alexander was not horrible his soph year. 10.3/4.3/1.9 isn't a bad stat line. I know he did shoot poorly, but you are making his sound like he's a JP Gavinski or someone. Come on now buddy!! I agree Miles (by the way Darius actually got some SportsCenter highlight time last night). Joe started as a sophomore in what is supposed to be one of the best conferences in all the land.

But he shot only 34.6% from the field. Would you rather have the guy who scores 16 points on 35% shooting or a guy who scores 10 points on 60% shooting? I mentioned I was disappointed in his shooting in my post. and it's a summer league. How many games was that? It's a very, very small sample size and let's not forget Alexander was also playing with the talent level you mention. He's played better in other 'real' games this year. So what does that mean? To help prove my point. He averaged 14.3 points on 44.3% shooting, 5.7 rebounds, 2.2 assists, 2.0 turnovers and 1.5 blocks in 30 minutes in the first 22 games of his junior year. In his final 11 games he averaged 21.6 points on 52.1% shooting, 6.9 rebounds, 2.9 assists, 2.0 turnovers and 1.4 blocks in 33 minutes. What does that prove? That you think these numbers in the Big East conference makes a player suck? There's nothing wrong with either of those numbers in my opinion. If that's bad, give me 12 Joe Alexanders at a major conference. In your opinion, what is average? 25 ppg while shooting 60%? What's good then? 35 ppg with 75% shooting? There's no way Alexander was a bad college player and if that's your point I will disagree regardless of what 'bad' numbers you mention. To say Alexander is bad is like saying Braun or Hardy are barely average. It's nowhere near the truth IMO. If you hate the guy for some reason, that's fine. There's no logic behind calling Alexander 'bad'.

I would take Conley over Alexander in a second and I'm not even a Conley fan. I can't believe the Bucks got duped into taking Alexander. He was a mediocre to bad college player until the last 15 games of his final season and shot up the boards based on that. He shot even further up after he tested out as a great athlete. The guy has looked completely lost in the little time he has actually played, he looked awful in the preseason and looked awful in the summer league against guys who get signed to 10 day contracts. It's better to admit the mistake now and get value while you can than to hang onto him until he holds no value. I respect your opinion that you want Conly over Alexander, but I think you're going a bit far on 'how bad' Alexander is in your mind. He averaged 16 points per 48 in the summer league and it's a summer league. Players are working on new things and such and I wouldn't put a ton of weight on that. I was disappointed with how poorly he shot, but I don't think he was 'completely lost'. I wouldn't call Alexander a bad player in college. That is stretching it big time IMO. If you don't like the player, that's fine. I just wouldn't pull things out of nowhere to prove why you think Alexander sucks. Playing in a major conference, starting his sophomore year, and helping to lead a team to the NCAA tourney his junior isn't a bad college player. If he's a bad college player, college teams should be recruiting these 'bad players' on a more regular basis.

There will be other options besides Duffy, Nixon and Gwynn that come up before the offseason is over. 4th OFers are a dime a dozen. Until one of the starters gets hurt. If Kapler would've signed here for a million, I think it's a pretty decent mistake. The last thing I want to see is Gwynn being the number 4 OF or starting because of an injury. Maybe Kapler had no interest in playing here and that would be understandable if Tampa is going to give him more playing time. I'm more worried about the depth in the OF than Kapler I guess, but Kapler would be much more productive IMO than anything else the Brewers have for the number 4 OF. I'm still holding out hope that Gwynn is traded or DFA'd, but I don't think that'll happen.

It sounds like you are greatly undervaluing defense, just like the Bucks have for years. The Bucks have enough offense with Redd, RJ, and Bogut. They only need a PG who plays good defense and distributes the ball to the scorers. Also, Conley is younger than both Sessions and Alexander. Sessions is horrible on defense, and Alexander appears to be the same. RJ is a huge upgrade defensively over Yi. I don't think I'm undervaluing defense in terms of RJ vs. Yi. I think cost also comes into play. RJ costs a hell of a lot more than Yi. RJ is a better defender than Yi, but I wouldn't pay that much for defense. I still hope RJ gets out of the funk he's in because given his contract and Yi's Yi is the much better value in my opinion. If only we could've somehow given up Simmons AND Gadz in that deal... I don't think Conley is an upgrade over Sessions on defense. Conley is smaller and like I posted will continue the struggles from the point guard position. If Conley is heads and shoulders above Sessions on a defensive end, it would make more sense straight up. I just don't think he is and bigger point guards have their way with him in terms of posting him up and being more physical. I also don't think Conley is 6-1. I've stood next to him and he's close to my height if not my height - 5-10. Sessions is a year and half older than Conley and Alexander is less than a year older than Conley. That's not enough in my eyes to justify who has more or less potential and is pretty much a non-issue in my eyes.

Would you trade Alexander for Conley straight up? Or, if they were both in the same draft, which would you take first? I personally would take Alexander. I think he can be a player in this league despite what some here might think. I don't think Conley is going to pan out. I think if Ohio State doesn't have Oden/have a solid year he's still playing at OSU. Memphis won 22 games last year and right now is 11 - 26 right now. With that being said Conley has managed play about the same during his career as Sessions, short worse FG % than Sessions, average less assists and rebounds, and scored less than Sessions. I want zero part of Conley given what the team has. To answer your question about the two, I would take Alexander over Conley. If they were in the same draft, I'd take whichever position was more of a need. The only thing I don't like about the Alexander pick is that it wasn't a need given the roster and taken picks like that in the lottery is how teams continue to draft in the lottery IMO. How is trading Alexander when he has little value and just upside any different than drafting Alexander when he has little value and just upside? Why draft him then? Trading him now makes the Bucks look quite stupid and I don't think the Bucks are that stupid. My point is that if Alexander would play a bit he may show something that drives up his value. Contracts are guaranteed in the NBA so drafting Alexander meant the Bucks believed in him in some shape or form. His value to me is as low as it'll be during his career and if they do want to trade him they should go ahead and play him a bit more to showcase him. I see Sessions and Joe for Conley essentially giving up one of the two for nothing. It's terrible value. It was my (self-limited) understanding that the Bucks would have rather had Conley than Yi in the 2007 draft and that they "settled" for Joe Alexander after trying to figure out how to trade up to get someone they really wanted in 2008's draft. If they make this deal they would have traded Yi, Sessions and Alexander for Conley, Jefferson and (presumably) a first round draft pick in 2009. Jefferson has been a bust and is overpaid (should've kept Yi at this point) and giving up Sessions would be a terrible move. If it's Alexander straight up for Conley that's fine if the Bucks really believe Conley is going to be anything. Or I guess straight up for Sessions. Conley isn't going to be anything special and given his size will continue to present defensive limitations that Bucks have struggled with what seems like forever.

You don't have to believe it. It was also all over the Memphis paper (they picked up on it first) and one of the guys on realgm said the player's agents were notified and as of early last night they thought the deal was going to get done. I don't know if it will or won't, but that's what I know right now. I know I don't have to believe it, but I think it's overpaying. The Memphis papers have had Conley traded a few times and it usually has involved Portland. If for some reason the deal would go through, I think it's a terrible move. It'd be trading Alexander when he has next to little value and just 'upside'.

Gery Woelfel says this deal is done pending approval from Kohl. No offense, but I really don't care what he says. I think it's just a rumor until there's more sources out there saying otherwise. The trade doesn't make any sense and would go against exactly what the Bucks are trying to do. Memphis would give up Conley for much less than that. They've been trying to give him up for even less than Sessions and from what I know from some Memphis folks the Bucks would be giving up much more than what's been offered for Conley up to this point. I think if salaries make sense (not sure if they do) Alexander would be enough to get Conley...that's why I think this trade carries little weight as constructed per Gery.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3829521 I know it's not 'official' so feel free to move if it should. Just thought I'd post here since it may have an impact on Sheets.

I hope this move isn't true. To me, it doesn't make sense and even if it saves $3.5 million there are much easier ways to save money long-term (Redd, Jefferson, Gadz, etc.). I don't think this rumor carries a ton of weight since it includes two young pieces that the Bucks I thought were pretty high on. I still think the Bucks will be making a trade that will bring in an additional player since they have one roster spot left. I'm one of the rare people that thinks the Bucks do have some nice young talent that could develop, but trading Sessions and Alexander would kind of void that statement to a certain degree. I don't think I'd do Sessions for Conley straight up.

I really enjoyed the episode, but I love 24. I can understand how some of the things are similar each season and at times it isn't 'new'. Chloe is still in this season I believe at some point. I think I saw her in one of the commercials. It'll be interesting to see what type of role she has.

I'd also like a copy if possible. Let me know. Thanks!

yawn... wake me up for the real basketball at the Bradley Center on Saturday... MU vs. West Virginia. Should be a good one with 3x as many people there... Speaking of real basketball...who made the Sweet 16 last...glorious MU who plays 'real' basketball or the crappy UWM team? (hint it's not the team in the Big East that hasn't met expectations the past few years and has been upset a few times). Sorry if I sound like a jerk, but these posts aren't needed. It's similar to those who post in the Bucks threads that the Bucks or the NBA sucks.

I was only talking about weather. It seemed like that was the determining factor according to you - maybe I misread your post - but there are plenty of cold weather places that sign free agents. The next question is "why are they able to?" To me, winning and payroll are the big factors. Stuff to do in the city may have an impact but if you're married with kids one place is the same as the next - especially if the wife and kids don't make the move with you. I thought I emphasized in previous posts that given the lack of winning and the weather Milwaukee is not on the top of the lists of free agents. I apologize if I didn't. I just think that free agents (established guys) will not put Milwaukee near the top of their list unless Milwaukee overpays for them. I guess if you look at warmer weather teams they seem to be able to bring in established players even though their team may have not had winning seasons. I hope that clarifies it and makes more sense.

They do. They live in AZ, Cali, or Florida in the winter and in Milwaukee, Chicago, Boston, Detroit, etc. during the summer. It's less to do with weather and more to do with the fact that Milwaukee is a small town with little to do (for a guy in his 20's with millions in the bank - I happen to like MKE). I agree with you to a point. I just think regardless of what there is to do Chicago, Boston, and Detroit also have been better places to play in terms of winning in the past. Hopefully that changes, but there's a reason free agents don't come to Milwaukee when dollars are similar/Brewers over pay. I think the current management team will change that, but to compare Milwaukee to the cities you mentioned isn't quite fair IMO. For a guy in your 20's with millions in the bank, what city would you prefer to live in year round?

A thread on Milwaukee's attractiveness as a destination for players would certainly be appropriate, too. I would have split that discussion out of this thread had the post that prompted that discussion been of decent quality. Which post are you looking at? Back to Hoffman...I agree that Hoffman and Sheets would make for a nice off-season. I still think there might be some bargains out there in the next few weeks.

In general fans seem to think that pitchers are a lot healthier on average than they really are and in Sheets specific case the fact that one injury bridged two seasons seems to make people think he is more injury prone than he really is. I think there's such a strong opinion among many fans that Ben Sheets is so injury-prone, and that it's largely due to the emotional investment we make in following the Brewers. When it's pointed out that perhaps Sheets isn't all that much more injury-prone than people believe, I think many can be quick to assume the people trying to contextualize Sheets's health are just apologists & out to take on the popular view just because it's popular. Really imo, it's just that the popular view on Sheets's durability tends to gloss over some important details. I'll take these two points and turn it a different way. What if Sheets played and performed the same way in New York as he did with Milwaukee...and had the same injuries. Would it flow under the radar? I think to a certain extent his specific injuries are why some fans feel the way they do. I he's looked at as a 'wuss' or those things with some of the injuries and I don't think Milwaukee fans differ from how he'd be viewed by those fans elsewhere. I'm not saying those injuries weren't serious or wouldn't cause any pitcher to miss time, but I think if he would've broke a leg off a line drive instead of some of the less 'intense' injuries he had he'd be viewed differently. I hope I'm making sense with that. I think Sheets is injury-prone (not like most injury-prone pitchers), but I'd still sign him (unless theres info we don't know). I just think it has to be accepted chances are he won't be healthy the full season in order to not have the feeling of disappointment some fans still carry with Sheets. He's a legit #1 when healthy, but he's just had some bad luck that seems to have continued year to year the past few years. He's not injury prone like othe rpitchers who have major arm issues, so that should've been the big plus with him. The small market Sheets plays in may have some factor in why he's thought of the way he is by fans, but I just think some fans can't get over the strange injuries he's had. I agree there is a difference with pitchers who've had arm injuries over their career and Sheets.

And most players DO live in warmer climates year around. Just because they play ball in Milwaukee doesn't mean they can't live in a warmer climate during winter!! So obviously, their families don't live here year round. The school year takes up about 3 months of the baseball season. 2 months at the beginning and 1 at the end. If you take into account that the player is on the road approximately 1/2 of that time, the player is missing their families for 1 month at the beginning of the year, and 2 weeks at the end of the year more than if they were close to home. The school year really doesn't have a bearing on anything because unless the player plans on living here, they are not going to switch schools for 3 months. And during the 4 month summer months, the family can live in Milwaukee, or commute back and forth. I'm sure players can afford to buy multiple plane tickets. Players do not live in warmer climates year round if they play in Milwaukee. Milwaukee is not a warm climate. I'm not going to go into this into a debate you apparently want to start, but it's how things work. If Milwaukee is offering a similar figure to a warmer climate, the warmer climate is probably going to win. I think you're forgetting about spring training and like you brought up the fact their on the road. If you have a family and kids and they live in CA and you play in Milwaukee, how much fun is your family going to have in Wisconsin away from all their other family and living in your apartment/condo/house that is temporary? I think you're vastly negating that fact. Milwaukee isn't anywhere near the top of the list for free agents to come. If the team keeps winning maybe, but that's the bad part of baseball and not having a salary cap. Milwaukee just isn't a place most professional athletes would want their families to live if they're from other parts of the country. If you think Milwaukee is a great place for free agents, that's your opinion and that's fine. I personally think it's in the lower 1/3 and that might be too kind on my part. I've lived in Wisconsin and Milwaukee and it's not a terrible place to live. I think the perception for those never living in Wisconsin or Milwaukee isn't very kind and does not help bring free agents to the city.

I get the feeling, from reading this thread, that many people that live hear don't fully appreciate the negative views that people who have never lived in Milwaukee have about the city. Not just ballplayers, but people in general. It's not just the city, but also the midwest in general. I know several people down here that would stay in a warm climate and never receive another pay raise or take a pay cut instead of moving to MN, WI, MI, etc. The city doesn't help anything either. Milwaukee just doesn't rank very high on the maps of players. You can look at the Milwaukee Bucks as another example. The two teams don't have the tradition or a hard salary cap in their leagues that the Packers do.

It's pretty warm in Milwaukee for most of the baseball season last time I checked. Sure, it's cold in April, but the rest of the season is pretty ideal. Plus, you get to play indoors for the first month in a heated stadium so I don't think the weather is as big of an issue as people make it. It's not like we're asking him to live here during the offseason. For me, there's nothing better than summer in Milwaukee because it doesn't get so damn hot that often like it does in the South. Players would prefer to live in a warmer climate year round. This gives them the opportunity to be able to have their family stay close. Most players that play for the Brewers don't have their families live in Wisconsin year round and thus either are away from their family during the school year or have to switch their kids in different schools. From what I know, it is a big issue. Milwaukee doesn't have any 'wow' factors. Players are quite happy going through the Brewers system, but when push comes to shove the Brewers will most likely lose those players eventually or hope they fall in love with the city. Getting free agents to buy into moving their family to Milwaukee usually won't work. This means they'll be away from their families February through May/June and August through September. Obviously those months all depend on school districts, but it is a significant amount of time to be away from family. I appreciate you 'checked' last time TuesdaysWithRillo, but Milwaukee doesn't have that same appeal you may think it does. I lived in Wisconsin for 23 years and I can tell you right now I can see exactly why players don't want to move there. Young guys coming up through the system really don't mind, but getting guys from other climates to come to Milwaukee isn't easy. Since you're comparing this to yourself and what you like in the summer, would you rather be with your family or away from your family (let's say you have a few children -- no clue if you do or not) while your kids are growing up? The key for the Brewers is to continue to get guys like Braun to buy into Milwaukee. Established guys are more likely to pass on Milwaukee unless they get paid more or have their opportunities otherwise limited.

So can all of the "nobody wants to come to Milwaukee" bickering finally end now? Not until Milwaukee starts being one of the places players want to go. It's nothing against Milwaukee, but that's just reality IMO. Most players would prefer to live in warmer climates, teams that have won over time, and teams that over time also are willing to pay market value. It's not to say Milwaukee will never get guys as this proves. If Gagne didn't have all his issues last off-season and Hoffman was five years younger, they never end up in Milwakee. Regardless I like the signing. I think Hoffman has at least another year left in him and I think maybe more importantly he'll still be in the NL where he is very familiar with hitters.